Prior decisions have held that the addition or omission
of a hyphen is immaterial with regard to whether a domain name is identical
or confusingly similar to a trademark. See Luxottica S.r.l. v. Lux Ottica
LLC, WIPO Case No. D2002-0904 (the
domain name found identical or confusingly similar to
the trademarks LUXOTTICA and LUX OTTICA & design).
...A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the trademarks in which the Complainant has rights. ...
2004-09-16 - Case Details
These domain names are confusingly similar to the registered trademark SKATTEBETALAREN, in which the Complainant has rights. “Skattebetalaren” and “Skattebetalarna” are almost identically spelled and pronounced. ...It is therefore the Panel’s opinion that the registered domain names are confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
According to its own allegations the Complainant has not authorized the Respondents to register any domain name containing the word “Skattebetalarna”, which is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s registered trademark SKATTEBETALAREN. ...
2005-08-10 - Case Details
Administrative panels and arbitrators considering similar cases where registrants
simply added a country name to a registered trademark have found such domain
names to be confusingly similar. ...D2000-0028 (transfer ordered where domain
name was found to be identical or confusingly similar to the CELLULARONE trademark).
Therefore, the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the ADL Mark pursuant to the Policy paragraph 4(a)(i).
...
2005-10-12 - Case Details
iii) Complainant argues that the Disputed Domain Names are confusingly similar to the DEERE and JOHN DEERE Marks. Complainant asserts that XC2’s and Disputed Domain Names are virtually identical and confusingly similar to Complainant’s DEERE and JOHN DEERE Marks because the and Disputed Domain Names are merely typographical misspellings of Complainant’s famous DEERE Mark. ...XC2 c/o Internet Coordinator, NAF Case FA 933070 (ordering transfer) ( domain name registered by XC2 comprised of a typographical misspelling of the complainant’s POM WONDERFUL mark held to be confusingly similar); see also, ESPN, Inc. v. XC2, No.
WIPO Case No. D2005-0444 (ordering transfer) ( held to be confusingly similar to complainant’s ESPNEWS mark).
...
2008-02-29 - Case Details
D2001-1035 (October 24, 2001) (finding confusingly
similar to RED BULL); Playboy Enterprises Int’l, Inc. v. SAND Web Names For
Sale, WIPO Case No. D2001-0094 (April
3, 2001) (finding confusingly similar to PLAYBOY); NetWizards,
Inc. v. Spectrum Enterprises, WIPO Case
No. D2000-1768 (April 4, 2001) (finding confusingly
similar to NETWIZARDS); Telstra Corp. ...
2004-02-09 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant’s rights in its L’ORÉAL mark are evidenced by its registrations of the mark and in its continued use of the mark. ...D2012-1737 (finding that the respondent’s use of the domain names to display websites identical or substantially and confusingly similar to the complainant’s website indicates to the panel that the respondent viewed the disputed domain name to be confusingly similar to complainant’s trademark).
...
2018-02-02 - Case Details
In any event, the Panel holds that there is nothing in the Response that would alter the Panel’s findings in this case.
6. Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel finds that the disputed the disputed domain name in issue is identical to the Complainant’s trademarks in some respects, and confusingly similar in other respects. ...As a result, the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the acronym and trademark CIC by which the Complainant is widely known. It is also confusingly similar to Complainant’s trademarks in CREDIT DUO CIC and CREDIT PROJECT CIC.
...
2012-06-08 - Case Details
D2003-0994 (finding that disputed domain names are confusingly similar to the trademarks which they misspell); Dow Jones & Company, Inc. and Dow Jones, L.P. v. ...D2000-1259 (holding that the deliberate introduction of errors or changes does not render the Respondent’s domain name less confusingly similar to the core trademark held by the Complainant).
For these reasons, the Respondent’s disputed Domain Name must be found confusingly similar to the Complainant’s TURBOTAX trademark.
...
2020-09-01 - Case Details
page 3
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel has considered the whether the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s
registered Mark. The Panel has also considered whether the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to
the Complainant’s corporate name, which has acquired secondary meaning.
1. Confusing Similarity with the Complainant’s Registered Mark
The Panel finds that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s ADM Mark.
...
2022-06-01 - Case Details
The Panel considers that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the
Complainant’s trademark ARCELORMITTAL. The typosquatting practice of deleting a letter “r” and adding
the letter “x” does not prevent this Panel to conclude that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to
the Complainant´s trademark. ...Discussion and Findings
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
B. Rights or Legitimate Interests
C. Registered and Used in Bad Faith
8. Decision...
2023-10-24 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The Panel accepts that the Complainant has rights in the MILLE MIGLIA Trade Marks, based on its International, USA, and EU registrations.
...This is based on the following:
(a) The Disputed Domain Names are confusingly similar to the Complainant's MILLE MIGLIA Trade Marks and carry a risk of implied affiliation with the Complainant.
...
2018-07-11 - Case Details
Prior WIPO UDRP panels have recognized that the incorporation of a trademark in its entirety may be sufficient to establish that a domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the complainant's registered mark. AT&T Corp. v. William Gormally,
WIPO Case No. D2005-0758 (finding confusingly similar to ATT); Quixtar Investments, Inc. v. ...D2000-1425 (finding confusingly similar to CREDIT LYONNAIS); Dixons Group Plc v. Mr. Abu Abdullaah,
WIPO Case No. D2000-1406 (finding confusingly similar to DIXONS).
...
2010-05-05 - Case Details
D2004-0589, “no good faith can be assumed in Respondent’s conduct, in view of the fact that the Domain Name is confusingly similar with Complainant’s trademark and is used in connection with the promotion and sale of competing products”.
...However, it would be difficult to accept that a website to which a confusingly similar domain name resolves, particularly a domain name which so obviously takes advantage of the fame of the trademark to which it is confusingly similar, could constitute a bona fide offering. ...
2012-06-01 - Case Details
Parties’ Contentions
A. Complainant
A.1 Identical or Confusingly Similar
Complainant submits that the domain name in dispute
is virtually identical to Complainant’s United States
trademark registration for EA STORE and is confusingly similar to Complainant’s
registered trademarks for and including EA. ...AAIM, WIPO
Case No. D2000-0403.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Pursuant to paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy, the Complainant must establish rights in a trademark and secondly that the domain name in dispute is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark in which the Complainant has rights.
...
2006-08-03 - Case Details
The Panel will deal with each of these requirements in turn.
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
The essential question here is whether the domain name is identical or confusingly similar to the trademark ‘SUPRÉ.’ Even if a domain name is not identical with a trademark, it is sufficient if the domain name is confusingly similar to it. The Panel has concluded that the domain name is confusingly similar to the trademark. ...
2005-01-05 - Case Details
The Complainant has a wide range of registered trademarks for the word “SWAROVSKI”.
The Domain Name is confusingly similar to the SWAROVSKI trade mark. Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark for purposes of the Policy, “when the domain name includes the trade mark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name” (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...Accordingly the Panel finds that the Domain Name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark. Accordingly the first condition of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been fulfilled.
...
2012-08-20 - Case Details
The Complainant contends that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark BHP BILLITON. The disputed domain name contains a misspelling of this trade mark, namely “bhpblliiton”. ...So, the Panel finds that the term “bhpblliiton” is confusingly similar to the trade mark of the Complainant. The added suffix “.com” does not change the finding that the disputed domain name is confusingly similar, since the suffix “.com” is understood to be a technical requirement. ...
2019-01-07 - Case Details
UDRP panels have consistently held that domain names are identical or confusingly similar to a trade mark for purposes of the Policy “when the domain name includes the trade mark, or a confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name” (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. ...Accordingly the Panel finds that the Domain Names are confusingly similar to the Complainant’s trade mark. Accordingly the first condition of paragraph 4(a) of the Policy has been fulfilled.
...
2011-04-28 - Case Details
The Complainant says that each of the disputed domain names is confusingly similar to its OLX trade mark. In respect of the first, third and fourth disputed domain names it says that the addition of geographic terms, namely Chennai, Bangalore and Mumbai to a word which is identical to its trade mark does not prevent these disputed domain names from being confusingly similar to the mark. ...Accordingly the three disputed domain names which have these characteristics remain confusingly similar to the Complainant’s OLX trade mark.
So far as the remaining disputed domain name, , is concerned, merely using the Complainant’s OLX trade mark twice does not prevent this domain name from being confusingly similar to that trade mark.
...
2014-12-01 - Case Details
A. Identical or Confusingly Similar
Paragraph 4(a)(i) of the Policy provides that the Complainant must establish that the Disputed Domain Name
is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark or service mark in which the Complainant has rights.
...The Panel will refer to the “ARCHER-DANIELS-MIDLAND trademark” in the remainder of this
decision in relation to such rights.
The Panel finds the Disputed Domain Name is confusingly similar to the ARCHER-DANIELS-MIDLAND
trademark. Previous UDRP panels have consistently held that domain names are identical or confusingly
similar to a trademark for purposes of the Policy “when the domain name includes the trademark, or a
confusingly similar approximation, regardless of the other terms in the domain name” (Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
...
2023-09-19 - Case Details